Self-Determination of Eligibility for Medication Abortion Without Ultrasonography Using a History-Based Tool: LMP-SURE.

IF 5.7 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Obstetrics and gynecology Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1097/AOG.0000000000005675
Courtney Kerestes, Mary Tschann, Marit Pearlman Shapiro, Erin Berry, Lori Gawron, Reni Soon, Bliss Kaneshiro
{"title":"Self-Determination of Eligibility for Medication Abortion Without Ultrasonography Using a History-Based Tool: LMP-SURE.","authors":"Courtney Kerestes, Mary Tschann, Marit Pearlman Shapiro, Erin Berry, Lori Gawron, Reni Soon, Bliss Kaneshiro","doi":"10.1097/AOG.0000000000005675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate a self-screening eligibility tool for medication abortion without an ultrasonogram.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We designed a patient-administered, five-question screening tool (LMP-SURE) that assesses gestational age plus factors associated with misdating or ectopic pregnancy. We recruited participants without prior ultrasonograms from family planning clinics in Alaska, Hawai'i, Idaho, and Utah to complete a brief survey including LMP-SURE and then obtained ultrasound dating by chart review. We compared eligibility for medication abortion by ultrasonogram with eligibility by the LMP-SURE screening tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We consented 1,026 participants; 781 met eligibility requirements and completed the tool. Using the LMP-SURE tool, we identified 493 participants (65.1%) eligible for medication abortion without an ultrasonogram. The LMP-SURE tool sensitivity (ability to correctly identify a patient ineligible for medication abortion) was 83.8% (95% CI, 73.1-90.8), specificity (ability to correctly identify a patient eligible for medication abortion) was 70.0% (95% CI, 66.4-73.3), likelihood ratio (-) (probability of someone eligible by LMP-SURE to be ineligible by ultrasonogram vs eligible by ultrasonogram) was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.13-0.40), and percentage of false-negatives was 1.5%. Only 11 patients (1.5%) who met eligibility for medication abortion without an ultrasonogram by the LMP-SURE tool were found ineligible for medication abortion by their ultrasonogram. Of those with conflicts, six (0.8%) had a gestational age beyond 77 days. The two participants (0.3%) diagnosed with ectopic pregnancies both required ultrasonograms by LMP-SURE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This patient-facing, brief, history-based screening tool can safely minimize the need for ultrasonogram before medication abortion.</p>","PeriodicalId":19483,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005675","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate a self-screening eligibility tool for medication abortion without an ultrasonogram.

Methods: We designed a patient-administered, five-question screening tool (LMP-SURE) that assesses gestational age plus factors associated with misdating or ectopic pregnancy. We recruited participants without prior ultrasonograms from family planning clinics in Alaska, Hawai'i, Idaho, and Utah to complete a brief survey including LMP-SURE and then obtained ultrasound dating by chart review. We compared eligibility for medication abortion by ultrasonogram with eligibility by the LMP-SURE screening tool.

Results: We consented 1,026 participants; 781 met eligibility requirements and completed the tool. Using the LMP-SURE tool, we identified 493 participants (65.1%) eligible for medication abortion without an ultrasonogram. The LMP-SURE tool sensitivity (ability to correctly identify a patient ineligible for medication abortion) was 83.8% (95% CI, 73.1-90.8), specificity (ability to correctly identify a patient eligible for medication abortion) was 70.0% (95% CI, 66.4-73.3), likelihood ratio (-) (probability of someone eligible by LMP-SURE to be ineligible by ultrasonogram vs eligible by ultrasonogram) was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.13-0.40), and percentage of false-negatives was 1.5%. Only 11 patients (1.5%) who met eligibility for medication abortion without an ultrasonogram by the LMP-SURE tool were found ineligible for medication abortion by their ultrasonogram. Of those with conflicts, six (0.8%) had a gestational age beyond 77 days. The two participants (0.3%) diagnosed with ectopic pregnancies both required ultrasonograms by LMP-SURE.

Conclusion: This patient-facing, brief, history-based screening tool can safely minimize the need for ultrasonogram before medication abortion.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用基于病史的工具,在不进行超声波检查的情况下自我确定药物流产的资格:LMP-SURE。
目的:评估无需超声波检查的药物流产资格自检工具:评估无需超声波检查即可进行药物流产的自我筛查资格工具:我们设计了一种由患者自制、包含五个问题的筛查工具(LMP-SURE),用于评估妊娠年龄以及与误期或宫外孕相关的因素。我们从阿拉斯加州、夏威夷州、爱达荷州和犹他州的计划生育诊所招募了未做过超声波检查的参与者,让他们完成包括 LMP-SURE 在内的简短调查,然后通过病历审查获得超声波检查日期。我们比较了通过超声波检查和通过 LMP-SURE 筛查工具进行药物流产的资格:结果:我们同意了 1026 名参与者,其中 781 人符合资格要求并完成了工具。使用 LMP-SURE 工具,我们确定了 493 名参与者(65.1%)符合药物流产资格,无需进行超声波检查。LMP-SURE 工具的灵敏度(正确识别不符合药物流产条件的患者的能力)为 83.8%(95% CI,73.1-90.8),特异性(正确识别符合药物流产条件的患者的能力)为 70.0%(95% CI,66.4-73.3),似然比 (-) (通过 LMP-SURE 符合条件的人通过超声波检查不符合条件与通过超声波检查符合条件的概率)为 0.23(95% CI,0.13-0.40),假阴性比例为 1.5%。只有 11 名患者(1.5%)在未使用 LMP-SURE 工具进行超声波检查的情况下符合药物流产的条件,但通过超声波检查发现他们不符合药物流产的条件。在有冲突的参与者中,有 6 人(0.8%)的孕龄超过 77 天。两名被诊断为宫外孕的参与者(0.3%)都需要通过 LMP-SURE 进行超声波检查:结论:这一面向患者、简短、基于病史的筛查工具可安全地将药物流产前的超声波检查需求降至最低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Obstetrics and gynecology
Obstetrics and gynecology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
867
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: "Obstetrics & Gynecology," affectionately known as "The Green Journal," is the official publication of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Since its inception in 1953, the journal has been dedicated to advancing the clinical practice of obstetrics and gynecology, as well as related fields. The journal's mission is to promote excellence in these areas by publishing a diverse range of articles that cover translational and clinical topics. "Obstetrics & Gynecology" provides a platform for the dissemination of evidence-based research, clinical guidelines, and expert opinions that are essential for the continuous improvement of women's health care. The journal's content is designed to inform and educate obstetricians, gynecologists, and other healthcare professionals, ensuring that they stay abreast of the latest developments and best practices in their field.
期刊最新文献
False-Positive Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 Test Results With Rapid Seroreversion After Third-Trimester Tdap Booster Vaccination. Compliance Rate With Triage Test and Treatment for Participants Screening Positive in Cervical Cancer Screening Programs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Effects of Antihypertensive Therapy During Pregnancy on Postpartum Blood Pressure Control. Management of Vulvovaginal Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis. Navigating the Legal Landscape of Reproductive Rights and Medical Training After LePage v. Mobile Infirmary Clinic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1